New Submariner LV
Discussion
I like the new ceramic Subs. I'm not normally a fan of crown guards, but I like the understated look of the ones on the new Sub. It's still using the same 3135 movement though - Isn't it time they upgraded that? having a brand new design with a 22 year old movement might put some people off. Rolex should innovate for a change.
Mark.
Mark.
Edited by VXR_Driver on Saturday 20th March 08:48
Bit more of a consensus against here then over on TZ-UK, same for me as well, but it has to be said after a couple of years ppl will accept and get used to the new case style. The older models will be viewed as classics which means its win win all round. If anything Rolex are very clever at doing this, the one thing they would never want to do is damage the desirability and value of the older models. Ppl always say retained value only matters to those that flip a lot but this is nonsense, knowing that your Rolex retains its value so well has for a long time been a key factor in justifying the purchase cost. Bump the new models up by a grand which you can justify with all the improvements, then as they are styled differently many will want the older ones that will now go up in value as not made any more and so it continues.
Do the new subs have the Parachrom hairspring etc.? Check out this article on the 3135:
http://www.chronometrie.com/rolex3135/rolex3135.ht...
Do the new subs have the Parachrom hairspring etc.? Check out this article on the 3135:
http://www.chronometrie.com/rolex3135/rolex3135.ht...
ShadownINja said:
I have absolutely no idea what you lot are talking about? Not even one picture posted. Bloomin' forum noobs!
New - 
Old-
At the moment, the 'new shape' Ceramic Sub is only available in gold/bi-metal, the Stainless version is yet to be released.
The difference people don't like (and it is very noticeable when you look, the photos don't do the difference justice, is in the shape around the lugs. The new one is much chunkier and looks very heavy-handed; it also has the added effect of making the bracelet look small.
I personally don't like it; tried on an 'old' Sub LV the other day at an AD that had the new ones in, they looked ghastly in comparison.
The difference in the crown guards is even bigger. TBH none of this is remotely surprising, the GMTIIC and the WG/TT subs have been out for a while so no one could have been surprised by the pictures from Basel of the new SS sub, all green LV a bit much though. We should be thankful that the bracelet centre links are brushed, that would have been a step to far.
The one thing I don't really agree with though is the many comments those in the pro camp make about quality etc. For sure a nicer clasp is good and stuff like a ceramic insert that is harder to scratch and a bezel running on bearings etc. all looks and sounds highly attractive but these are just extra new features. Features that have a cost associated with them, the new ceramic inserts for example seem to cost about 10x to replace what the old alu ones did, and the alu ones whilst they might get scratched they don't shatter or crack if you knock them. I guess what I am saying is that what attracted to me to Rolex in the first place is the unique combination of super tough tool and elegant understated styling that will last a lifetime. On both counts IMHO Rolex are moving away from that position to make something more flashy and expensive feeling. I guess those that collect vintage Rolex would say though they have been playing that game for the past 30 years, so maybe nothing new in that case?
The one thing I don't really agree with though is the many comments those in the pro camp make about quality etc. For sure a nicer clasp is good and stuff like a ceramic insert that is harder to scratch and a bezel running on bearings etc. all looks and sounds highly attractive but these are just extra new features. Features that have a cost associated with them, the new ceramic inserts for example seem to cost about 10x to replace what the old alu ones did, and the alu ones whilst they might get scratched they don't shatter or crack if you knock them. I guess what I am saying is that what attracted to me to Rolex in the first place is the unique combination of super tough tool and elegant understated styling that will last a lifetime. On both counts IMHO Rolex are moving away from that position to make something more flashy and expensive feeling. I guess those that collect vintage Rolex would say though they have been playing that game for the past 30 years, so maybe nothing new in that case?
Isn't it just the newer GMT 2C case?
The bezel inserts though ceramic look smaller that the new GMTs though?
I think the larger numerals on the GMT2c bezel give it a more balanced look than the new sub. Having the larger case but same small numerals on the bezel makes the watch look a bit odd.
The bezel inserts though ceramic look smaller that the new GMTs though?
I think the larger numerals on the GMT2c bezel give it a more balanced look than the new sub. Having the larger case but same small numerals on the bezel makes the watch look a bit odd.
ShadownINja said:
Thanks. Yes, I see the problem. It ruins the lines and does make the bracelet look too narrow.
No worries chap. As I said, the difference is more noticeable in the metal. el stovey said:
Isn't it just the newer GMT 2C case?
Basically yes. Rolex are just making all of the models look similar case design wise. andy_s said:
Funny, I wonder if the old one had the lugs/crown guard like the new one and the new version had smaller lugs/crown guard whether we'd say the new version was an instant classic or whether people would criticise the new fangled 'girly' bits...
Interesting point, a possibility for sure.I personally don't like the new shape one.
Hence my temptation recently to buy a Sub LV and have one of the last of the 'old' ones. I'm glad I didn't though, a Submariner may well be in my collection in the future, but I'd sooner get an SD first I think.
Here it is without the linky.
As a 16610LV wearer, all I can say is 'Fark me, that is ugly.' Matches the rest of the Rolex range as updated. IMHO. They've gone off their collective trollies. Bracelets which are a thing of understated beauty look way too thin with these new chunky cases.
As a 16610LV wearer, all I can say is 'Fark me, that is ugly.' Matches the rest of the Rolex range as updated. IMHO. They've gone off their collective trollies. Bracelets which are a thing of understated beauty look way too thin with these new chunky cases.
The splendidly hilarious thing is that the all-stainless version of the new Sub is already available as a replica before Rolex have released it. I wonder whether Rolex will subtly alter the design when they release the stainless new Sub - just to make those early-bird replicas obvious fakes?
This new Sub 'replica' is scarily real. It's the one where the counterfeiters have got bored making the case and bracelet identical to the genuine watch, and are now modifying ETA movements to look superficially like the 3135 Rolex movement. And no, I'm not joking. You can tell the difference easily by the balance shock protector - on the modified ETA it's an Etachoc (the shamrock-shaped one), on the Rolex genuine it's more traditional Incabloc (tuning-fork shape).
The bracelet fine adjustment is a million times better than the old Sub and SD. Personally I'd like an old-shape SD with the new bracelet - the old SD bracelet always felt flimsy to me, regardless of the fact that it 'just worked'.
I'm waiting to see whether Rolex make a design change on the stainless Sub - there was a short run of replicas immediately after the two-tone was available (presumably they used the watch as a template) which are indistinguishable for anyone unless you remove the back (or do the date quickset). The crown guards were always the first tell on replica Subs, but the new one has very regular crown guards and the replica is identical...
(not condoning anything here, so no flames please)
This new Sub 'replica' is scarily real. It's the one where the counterfeiters have got bored making the case and bracelet identical to the genuine watch, and are now modifying ETA movements to look superficially like the 3135 Rolex movement. And no, I'm not joking. You can tell the difference easily by the balance shock protector - on the modified ETA it's an Etachoc (the shamrock-shaped one), on the Rolex genuine it's more traditional Incabloc (tuning-fork shape).
The bracelet fine adjustment is a million times better than the old Sub and SD. Personally I'd like an old-shape SD with the new bracelet - the old SD bracelet always felt flimsy to me, regardless of the fact that it 'just worked'.
I'm waiting to see whether Rolex make a design change on the stainless Sub - there was a short run of replicas immediately after the two-tone was available (presumably they used the watch as a template) which are indistinguishable for anyone unless you remove the back (or do the date quickset). The crown guards were always the first tell on replica Subs, but the new one has very regular crown guards and the replica is identical...
(not condoning anything here, so no flames please)
I've always thought the green Rolex were ugly watches TBH.
The new GMT had a similar bad reception when it first came out and it's a hugely popular watch. I remember all the same posts about it when the first photos were released.
I bet these big case Subs will look, like the new GMT, much better in the flesh.
The new GMT had a similar bad reception when it first came out and it's a hugely popular watch. I remember all the same posts about it when the first photos were released.
I bet these big case Subs will look, like the new GMT, much better in the flesh.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff